CA4PRS

Construction Analysis for Pavement Rehabilitation StrategiesAccelerated Road Work for Work Zone Safety & Mobility

Peer Exchange WorkshopJune 5-6, 2012

E.B. LeeInstitute of Transportation Studies

Univ. of California at Berkeley

Chang Mo KimUniversity of California at Davis

CA4PRS 2

Transportation Trends (1970-2010)

Up 580%

Up 32%

Up 63%

Up 90%

Up 132%

Up 6%

Travel Miles1970

Americans Drivers Vehicles Ton Miles Highways

Aging

Congestion

Freights

CA4PRS

CA4PRS HistoryCA4PRS History• CA4PRS Software Development

– Pooled-fund (CA, FL, MN, TX, WA): UC Berkeley 2003– Help DOT agencies develop more economical highway

construction and TMP strategies • FHWA Outreach

– 2009 Market-ready Innovation and Technology Product– Arranged Free-group License for State DOTs– Training: 1,200 Eng (20 DOTs), 12 univ., Online course

• AASHTO Promotion– CAST: WZ Traffic Tools: 2007-2009

CA4PRS

CA4PRS Analysis ProcessCA4PRS Analysis Process

Decision-Support Model Multi-discipline Teamwork

CA4PRS 5

CA4PRS Comparison Alternatives CA4PRS Comparison Alternatives • Pavement Design Alternatives

– Maintenance & Rehabilitation Strategies• Rigid: JPCP, CRCP, Precast• Flexible: Overlay, Milling-filling AC, Full-depth AC

– Variation: Cross-section, Mix, Base type• Work-zone Traffic Alternatives

– Closure timing (Night, Day, Weekend, Continuous) – Optimized Lane Closure Hours & Numbers– WZ Demand Sensitivity & Capacity Sensitivity

• Contractor’s Logistics Alternatives– Site access and Construction sequence– Constructability (demo/mix): Resource optimization

• Competing Objectives: Integration & Collaboration

CA4PRS

• Pavement Cost: Itemized unit-price and quantity– Materials (PCC, HMA, RAC, Pre-cast), Base, Subbase– Item unit-price from bid-database

• Non-pavement Cost: % of construction cost – Earth work cost; Drainage cost– Specialty items(Retaining/Barrier), Stormwater (SWPPP)

• Traffic Costs– TMP (COZEEP, I/D) and Traffic-handling, Outreach

• Indirect Cost: % of construction cost– Minor Items, Mobilization, Supplemental, Contingency– Support: Agency (Plan, Design, Traffic, Construction)

• Other Optional Costs– Structures and ROW

CA4PRS EstimateAgency (Project) Cost

CA4PRS EstimateAgency (Project) Cost

=> Total Project Cost

CA4PRS

• Planning Stage (PSR/PA&ED): Scope and Priority– VE Analysis and Life-cycle Cost Analysis

• Design Stage: PS&E & TMP packages– Working-days (CPM); Construction staging plans – TMP Report and Lane closure chart– Contract Type Selection: A (cost)+B(schedule); I/D

• Construction Stage– Validate contractor’s work-plans and CCOs

• Upcoming Enhancement Modules– V3.0 Roadway Widening Module– V4.0 Bridge Replacement Module– V5.0 LCCA Interaction Module

7

CA4PRS Implementation in the Project Life Cycle ProcessCA4PRS Implementation

in the Project Life Cycle Process

CA4PRS

Hands-on Training Workshops:Caltrans + 20 DOTs => 1,200 engineers

CA4PRS Nationwide Implementation MapCA4PRS Nationwide Implementation Map

CA4PRS

CA4PRS Implementation Projects List (as of Feb 2011)CA DOT (Caltrans) Projects

No Route Location Type Cost Savings Distance Year Status1 I-10 Pomona, D7 AC Rehab $16M $0.3M 1 mile 2000 Partially adopted2 I-710 Long Beach, D7 AC Rehab $17M $1M 5 miles 2003 Adopted3 I-15 Devore-I, D8 PCC Rehab $16M $8M 3 miles 2005 Adopted4 I-15 Devore-II, D8 PCC Rehab $24M $4M 5 miles 2007 Adopted5 I-15 Ontario, D8 PCC Rehab $59M $5M 8 miles 2009 Adopted6 I-280 Santa Clara, D4 PCC CAPM $20M ($2M) 6 miles 2009 Not adopted7 US-101 San Jose, D4 AC CAPM $27M $3M 7 miles 2009 Partially Adopted8 I-680 San Ramon, D4 Rehab $70M $1M 12 miles 2010 Partially Adopted9 US-101 Ukiah, D1 PCC CAPM $19M $2M 6 miles 2010 Partially adopted10 I-5 Redding, D2 AC Rehab $50M - 14 miles 2011 Not adopted11 I-80 Sacramento, D3 PCC Rehab $92M $4M 9 miles 2011 Partially adopted12 I-5 Sacramento, D3 AC Rehab $88M - 17 miles 2011 Partially adopted13 SR-99 Elk Grove, D3 AC CAPM $21M ($3.5M) 14 miles 2010 Not adopted14 I-5 Yolo/Colusa, D3 AC CAPM $25M - 24 miles 2010 Not adopted15 I-5 Stockton, D10 CRCP Rehab $45M - 3 mile 2012 Adopted

Other State DOT Projects16 I-5 Seattle, WA PCC Rehab $5 - 2 miles 2005 Verification17 I-494 St. Paul, MN AC Rehab $10M - 10 miles 2004 Verification18 I-15 St. George, UT AC Rehab $16 $2M 8 miles 2010 Verification19 I-35 Oklahoma City, OK PCC Rehab $13M 6 miles 2010 Verification20 SR-39 Ogden, UT PCC Rehab $8M 1.3 miles 2011 Progress (implement)21 I-95 Richmond, VA AC Rehab $20M 5 miles 2012 Progress (Verification)22 I-5 Burlington, WA AC Rehab $15M 12 miles 2011 Adopted

CA4PRS

Concrete Pavement Cross-sectionsConcrete Pavement Cross-sections

(b) Concrete Slab Replacement

CONCRETE 205mm (8")

CTB 102mm (4")

AB 305mm (12")

SG

CONCRETE 305mm (12")

BASE 152mm (6")

AB 152mm (6")

SG

(c) Concrete Slab & Base Reconstruction(a) Milling Filling AC

ORExisting AC Pavement

51 mm

76 mm25 mm

0.5 hour

1 hour0.5 hour

Type C

Type CRAC-O

CA4PRS

Closure <=> Access <=> ProductionFull Closure for Concurrent MethodClosure <=> Access <=> ProductionFull Closure for Concurrent Method

Mobilization

Demolition Base PavingPCC Paving

Demobilization0.0

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.0

0 12 24 36 48 60 72 hour

prog

ress

(km)

Long Closure

Better Access

Faster Schedule

Higher Delay / Closure

CA4PRS

Closure <=> Access <=> ProductionPartial Closure for Sequential MethodClosure <=> Access <=> ProductionPartial Closure for Sequential Method

Mobilization

Demolition Base Paving PCC Paving

Demobilization0.0

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.0

0 12 24 36 48 60 72 hour

prog

ress

(km)

Short Closure

Limited Access

Slower Schedule

Less Delay / Closure

CA4PRS

CA4PRS WZ Traffic ModuleInputs & Outputs (HCM Model)

CA4PRS WZ Traffic ModuleInputs & Outputs (HCM Model)

• Basic Input Data– Closure schedule.– 24-hour traffic volumes.– User’s Time values (vehicle cost)

• WZ Impact Analysis Outputs– Max queue length and max delay per closure– Total Road User Cost – WZ Capacity (Sensitivity) and Demand Management

• Road user cost (RUC) Components– Delay cost; Vehicle operation costs: Detour cost

• WZ Analysis Application– Evaluate TMP (Lane Closure) Strategies– Contract: Incentives/Disincentive & A+B

CA4PRS 14

CA4PRS 15

CA4PRS

Importing Traffic Demand

16

CA4PRS

CA4PRS

CA4PRS

Lane Closure Charts

19

CA4PRS

Work Zone Capacity

20

CA4PRS

Delay Calculation

21

CA4PRS

Outputs: Summary of Results

22

CA4PRS

Output: Hourly Traffic Patterns

23

CA4PRS

Output: Lane Required

24

CA4PRS

Example - Sensitivity Analysis on Demand Management

Scenarios Demand Control Maximum Delay

Maximum Queue

Daily User Cost

Total User Cost

Scenario 1 No show 0 %Detour 0 % 57 min 3.3 miles $ 71K $ 8.2M

Scenario 2 No show 5 %Detour 5 % 37 min 2.6 miles $ 41K $ 4.7M

Scenario 3 No show 10 %Detour 10 % 24 min 1.9 miles $ 19K $ 2.2M

25

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

CA4PRS 26

I-15 Devore PCC Reconstruction Project, 2005I-15 Devore PCC Reconstruction Project, 2005

10 lane-mile of PCC Pavement were Rebuilt TWO 9-day closures (Non-stop Construction)

Saved $8M Agency Cost!It would take 10 month of Nighttime Closures

CA4PRS

I-15 Devore WZ Capacity: Full-closure Dynamic Lane Configuration Using QCMB

I-15 Devore WZ Capacity: Full-closure Dynamic Lane Configuration Using QCMB

CA4PRS 28

I-15 Devore Pre-construction Analysis CA4PRS Schedule-Traffic-Cost Comparison

TotalClosures

ClosureHours

Max.Delay(Min)

Delay (RUC)Cost ($M)

AgencyCost ($M)

TotalCost ($M)

One RoadbedContinuous (24/7) 2 400 80 5.0 25.0 30.0

72-Hour WeekdayNon-stop 8 576 50 8.0 26.0 34.0

55-Hour WeekendExtended 16 880 80 14.0 27.0 41.0

9-Hour NighttimeClosures 230 2,100 50 7.0 31.0 38.0

8-Hour NighttimeClosures 300 2,400 20 3.0 33.0 36.0

7-Hour NighttimeClosures 410 2,900 10 1.0 35.0 36.0

ConstructionScenario

ConstructionSchedule

CostWZ Traffic Delay

CA4PRS 29

Yes,70%

No,30%

Before- construction After-construction

I-15 Devore Web SurveysPublic Perception

I-15 Devore Web SurveysPublic Perception

Do you support future “Rapid-Rehab” projects?

OtherNegative

11%

No,Nighttime or

weekend64%

No, Cancelproject

14%

Adding lane,4%

Continuousclosures, 7%

Do you support 72-h (3-weekday) Weekday closures?

CA4PRS 30http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/research/roadway/ca4prs/index.htmhttp://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/research/roadway/ca4prs/index.htm

CA4PRS on Caltrans WebCA4PRS on Caltrans Web

CA4PRS 31

CA4PRS Download and InstallationCA4PRS Download and Installation

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/research/roadway/ca4prs/index.htm

1st

2nd

ID: CA4PRSPW: SPTC

CA4PRS 32

More Information?More Information?

• Contacts – Dr. E.B. Lee: UC Berkeley-ITS

• (510) 665-3637; eblee@berkeley.edu– Dr. Chang Mo Kim: UC Davis

• (530) 752-4886; chkim@ucdavis.edu– Ken Jacoby: FHWA Asset Management

• (202) 366-6503; Ken.Jacoby@dot.gov

– Siva Nadarajah: FHWA Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

• (202) 493-3147; Nadarajah.Sivaneswaran@dot.gov